How realistic is Macron’s perception of threat?

French President Emmanuel Macron announced on July 14, the Bastille Day, marking the outbreak of the 1789 French Revolution, that France will increase its defence spending in the next two years by 6.5 billion euros (3 billion euros in 2026 and 3.5 billion euros in 2027), and in 2027 France’s total defence spending would be 64 billion euros, double the amount that it was in 2017.

Macron declared in his Bastille Day speech: “Since 1945, freedom has never been so threatened, and never so seriously. To be free in this world, we must be feared. To be feared, we must be powerful.” He appealed to the people: “The nation needs you. Every French man and woman must be cognizant of the threat around us. We all need to make sacrifices. Freedom has a price tag.”

It is an aggressive speech from the leader of one of the leading democratic countries in Europe. And he is proposing to arm the country because Macron thinks that France is threatened. He has identifies the sources of threat as Russia, terrorism and online attacks. Russian attack on Ukraine is seen by western European democracies like France as a threat to democracy in Europe. It seems to be a rhetorical stance, to justify defence spending.

France is not directly threatened by Russia. France chooses to back Ukraine along with other NATO and European Union (EU) countries, and the threat to Ukrainian independence is considered a threat to the rest of Europe of Europe. It is this mindset of collective security that has drawn Europe into two world wars. And the sense of collective security has reappeared on the political horizon of Europe for the first time since the 1930s.

The serious question to be asked is whether the perceived Russian threat to Europe is an ideological one or is it a military threat. Russia is not interested in, nor capable of, threatening Europe militarily. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2024 was unjustified but the situation was complex. Russia was feeling threatened by the idea of Ukraine becoming a member of the Western military alliance, NATO. Russian President Vladimir Putin should have handled it with tact instead of going to war with Russia.

Is France’s decision to step up its defence spending massively a response to Russia, or is it a response to the pressure exerted by US President Donald Trump that European members of NATO must spend at least 5 per cent of their national GDP on defence because he felt that America was bearing the financial burden of NATO alone on its shoulders? It seems to be the case that Macron is responding to Trump’s pressure, and he has turned it into a grand statement against Russia.

The other two sources of threat that Macron has identified are terrorism and online attacks. There have been sporadic terrorist attacks in France by Islamic extremists. But the way to respond to terrorism is not an increase in defence expenditure but to formulate a strategy of isolating the extremist elements in the Muslim expat community in France, most of whom are from north African countries like Algeria, Morocco, Tunisia.

Macron does not recognise the fact that the religious extremists from these communities pose a threat to the communities themselves. There is a need to protect the North African communities, majority of whom are Muslims. This needs a social strategy. It would require that these communities should be integrated into French society. The subtle and the not-so-subtle discrimination that exists against the migrants, especially the Muslims, will need to end.

It is indeed puzzling that President Macron wants to counter online attacks through billions of euros on defence preparedness. Cyber-attacks have to be countered through technological upgradation and not through guns, tanks and fighter planes.